MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008683693 · doi:10.2196/15344

Design, Development, and Testing of an App for Dual-Task Assessment and Training Regarding Cognitive-Motor Interference (CMI-APP) in People With Multiple Sclerosis: Multicenter Pilot Study

2020· article· en· W3008683693 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andrea Tacchino, Renee Veldkamp, Karin Coninx, Jens Brulmans, Steven Palmaers, Päivi Hämäläinen, Mieke D’hooge, Ellen Vanzeir, Alon Kalron, Giampaolo Brichetto, Peter Feys, Ilse Baert

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovartis PharmaStiftelsen Promobilia
KeywordsCognitionCognitive trainingRehabilitationTask (project management)PsychologyElementary cognitive taskPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceMultimediaMedicinePhysical therapyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Dual tasking constitutes a large portion of most activities of daily living; in real-life situations, people need to not only maintain balance and mobility skills, but also perform other cognitive or motor tasks at the same time. Interest toward dual-task training (DTT) is increasing as traditional interventions may not prepare patients to adequately face the challenges of most activities of daily living. These usually involve simultaneous cognitive and motor tasks, and they often show a decline in performance. Cognitive-motor interference (CMI) has been investigated in different neurological populations, but limited evidence is present for people with multiple sclerosis (MS). The use of computerized tools is mandatory to allow the application of more standardized assessment and rehabilitation intervention protocols and easier implementation of multicenter and multilanguage studies. OBJECTIVE: To describe the design and development of CMI-APP, an adaptive and interactive technology tablet-based app, and to present the preliminary results of a multicenter pilot study involving people with MS performed in several European centers for evaluating the feasibility of and adherence to a rehabilitation program based on CMI-APP. METHODS: CMI-APP includes user-friendly interfaces for personal data input and management, assessment of CMI, and DTT. A dedicated team developed CMI-APP for Android tablets above API level 14 (version 4.0), using C# as the programming language and Unity and Visual Studio as development tools. Three cognitive assessment tests for working memory, information processing speed, and sustained attention and four motor assessment tests for walking at different difficulty levels were implemented. Dual cognitive-motor tasks were performed by combining single cognitive and motor tasks. CMI-APP implements exercises for DTT involving the following 12 cognitive functions: sustained attention, text comprehension, verbal fluency, auditory discrimination, visual discrimination, working memory, information processing speed, auditory memory, visual memory, verbal analog reasoning, visual analog reasoning, and visual spatial planning, which can be performed during walking or stepping on the spot. Fifteen people with MS (mean age 52.6, SD 8.6 years; mean disease duration 9.4, SD 8.4 years; mean Expanded Disability Status Scale score 3.6, SD 1.1) underwent DTT (20 sessions). Adherence to the rehabilitation program was evaluated according to the percentage of performed sessions, perceived exertion during the training (Borg 15-point Ratings of Perceived Exertion [RPE] Scale), and subjective experience of the training (Intrinsic Motivation Inventory [IMI]). RESULTS: The adherence rate was 91%. DTT was perceived as "somewhat difficult" (mean RPE Scale score 12.6, SD 1.9). IMI revealed that participants enjoyed the training and felt that it was valuable and, to some extent, important, without feelings of pressure. They felt competent, although they did not always feel they could choose the exercises, probably because the therapist chose the exercises and many exercises had few difficulty levels. CONCLUSIONS: CMI-APP is safe, highly usable, motivating, and well accepted for DTT by people with MS. The findings are fundamental for the preparation of future large-sample studies examining CMI and the effectiveness of DTT interventions with CMI-APP in people with MS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.337
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.086 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207